So my court day has come and gone. What a waste of a day. Everything that I expected to happen has happened. No vindication by the way. Just me waiting to be told that everything that I did not want to go through I had to go through, meaning the DNA test. Right now I have that feeling of anxiousness that usually comes with the wait for the results of an STD test. Weeks of waiting for the answer. You of course know that nothings wrong but you decided to go to the test anyway. Just to be safe right. But now you have to wait and think and dread. What if someone fucked up your test? What if the person got trashed the night before and read off the results wrong? What if they mix up the tests? I hate this shit.
So anyway I woke up on time and had my car ready to go but leaving NYC on a weekday morning is a bigger pain in the ass that I remember. So I was late showing up to court. Not a good start. Regardless I get there and I am still the first person called. This means I probably would have been waiting for over an hour had I showed on time. In the court room they swear me in (if I get sworn in just like a regular trial then why exactly do I have to prove my innocence unlike a regular trial?) and they read off the summons to me. "Do you understand what has been brought before you?" Seriously this whole thing should have been recorded. My response is "No your honor. I don't understand why I have been brought here because I have no idea who this person is." Oh by the way the plaintiff was not there. I think that was just extra special.
By my answer I would have thought that some sort of clarification would be forthcoming but that would have just been too easy. I now have to play detective and lawyer at the same time by reading body language, examining answers, and playing dumb cop by leading them into some sort of error. Their movements seem to indicate that something is up with the mother as they note that the kids last name is different that the plaintiff. Could be the kid has the same last name as the husband (or ex-husband) and the wife (ex-wife) doesn't, or the plaintiff is the guardian of the child because the mother is "indisposed". INDISPOSED by my understanding could be: in jail, rehab or dead. None of which helps me. So my instruction to have the plaintiff appear for visual identification was not listened to because 1) they are not required to and 2) maybe would not have been possible in the first place. Either way someone has lied to me which means the court office lied to me because that is where I got the instructions. Visual identification, by the way, said would help won't. The court, as it was explained to me, does not recognize my ability to deny the plaintiff based on sight. I of course explained that I was not hoping to see the person (although for story's sake I would LOVE to describe in detail for you) but to have her see me. The response was the court does not find visual recognition admissible. Well we can all see where this is going. By the middle of the afternoon I was able to find out what a q-tip tasted like. (I am still finding fibers in my mouth thank you very much.) Now its off to the lab.
The best part about all this. I will have to go back a second time to collect all the information and the courts findings. The reason: "So if this ever comes up again you have proof". Really inspiring my sense of faithfulness to the SYSTEM. My next step is to get my aunt to find me a lawyer. If this does get out of hand I want to be ready.
Oh AND I now have a time frame of conception and there is NO WAY I am involved so anyone who was doubting can toss that out right now.